Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro}

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 5:49:42 PM UTC+4, clifford wrote:

But the issue is, why create an ad hoc or experimental cmavo for this when it is handled well enough (i.e., logically perfectly) by what we have? Your conversation doesn't appear to pertain to the issue ("any" does not occur, for example). In the simplest terms -- to get back to the main point (I thought), the difference you want is between the {[su'o] da poi cidja} inside (indefinite) or outside (definite but one stated) the {lo nu terve'u da}.
I still don't see how either {le} or {lo} is or was related to attitudinals, but clearly they are not now, since {le} as {zo'e voi} is exactly parallel to {lo} as {zo'e noi} (I would have thought {poi}, but then I don't know what {zo'e} means, anyhow).
If you mean by "'can' and 'any' are related" that the the modal context of "can" is one of the places where "any" is an appropriate (even more clear) way "some" (or, from a different point of view, "all"), then you are right, but the rules about "any" are basically the same regardless of which context is involved, modal or negative or ... . I suspect you just not yet comfortable with using these rules in Lojban.

From: la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com>
To: loj...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro}

On Monday, August 27, 2012 9:05:26 PM UTC+4, clifford wrote:
"Give me three specific apples from the basket" seems to assume we have agreed (or, at least, I think we have) on which ones, so {ko fi mi dunda fe le ci plise} (dropping extraneous frills). Not the same as the previous case at all.

Yes, if we create ad-hoc cmavo {su'ai} it will look like
da su'ai - any (doesn't matter what exactly apples I need)
da su'ainai - some specific apples

1.- Where are you going?
2.- To buy some food [some specific food, namely apples but I haven't tell you yet]
3.- Well, I can buy food for you myself
4.- No, I need some specific food. Apples.
5.- Ah, I see.

In 2. we could use {da}/{cidja}.
In 4. we could use {da su'ainai}/{cidja sua'inai}

I don't see how xorlo -- widely appealed to but poorly understood -- affects this point, since it did not change the specific (or was it definite?) status of { le}. The thought that {le} is somehow related to attitudinals (but {lo} is not?) needs some developing to be clear.
Now it's history. I guess both {lo}/{le} worked like attitudinals. But now {lo}={zo'e noi} so we need to find another better way of solving this problem.

So does the notion that possible worlds are involved in all this essentially. I am no longer sure what problem {ro da zo'u mi su'omu'ei citka da} solves, if any (the relative scopes {ro da} and {su'o mu'ei} can be disputed), but, if it is "I can eat anything", then the {zo'u} is indispensable. But the possible worlds come from the "can", not "any", and it is they that require the prenex form.

I'm pretty sure that in this case and in these meanings "can" and "any" are related.

I am not sure how {e'o} works in all this, if it has any effect at all beyond politeness. And I assume you mean to take one of the four possible subsets in each world, not in all of them.

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 27, 2012, at 11:00 AM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:14:28 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:
la gleki, On 27/08/2012 05:34:
>
>
> On Saturday, August 25, 2012 10:58:19 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:
>
> la gleki, On 25/08/2012 15:23:
> > OK. Please translate
> >
> > "I could eat some specific apple from that basket, namely the yellow (all the others are red)"
>
> "mi su'o mu'ei citka le plise je se lanka be ta"
>
> > "I could eat any apple from that basket".
>
> "ro da poi ge plise gi se lanka ta zo'u mi su'o mu'ei citka da"
> >
> 1. So "Give me any three apples from the basket!" would be {ro da poi
> plise zo'u ko su'omu'ei dunda ci da}?

I think that means "For every bunch of apples, make it the case that you could give me three out of the bunch.

For "Give me any three apples", I'd suggest "e'o do dunda mi lo plise cimei", or "e'o do mi dunda ci da poi plise". Maybe "ko dunda" would do, but afaik scope of ko isn't defined.

"e'o do mi dunda ci da poi plise" - it's not Loglan. {dunda - x1 [donor] gives/donates gift/present x2 to recipient/beneficiary x3 [without payment/exchange].}

So it should be "e'o do fi mi dunda fe ci da poi plise".

Now translate "Give me three (specific) apples" - it will again be translated as "e'o do fi mi dunda fe ci da poi plise".

When I suggested
da - some/any
da su'a - any
da su'anai - some specific

I was hinting at a scale (specific/ non-specific). It's something that was completely lost after xorlo reform ({le} meant some objects that I have in mind and therefore worked much like an attitudinal. I'm not suggesting restoring pre-xorlo rules, of course).

I must acknowledge that {ro da zo'u mi su'omu'ei citka da} solves the problem (and I want exactly this sentence rephrased without {zo'u} like it's possible to do in English).
But if adding {e'o} turns it into "For every bunch of apples, make it the case that you could give me three out of the bunch."
then it's not a solution.

"any" (in this sense) is {su'o} number of apples from the set in the basket.

If we have 4 apples (numbered from 1 to 4) then "Give me three apples from the basket" would mean in all possible worlds ({romu'ei} ?) one of the following:
123
124
134
234

So here "Give me any three apples" = "In every possible world give me exactly three apples out of the 4 from that basket."

There's no single Lojban word corresponding to English _any_. But there are Lojban sentences expressing the meaning of English sentences that contain _any_.

> So in every possible world I'm asking for three {da}?

No.

> 2. Is it possible to get rid of {zo'u}?

In your Lojban? I can't a way, but maybe I'm being slow.

--And.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msg/lojban/-/FyxBrUzWluQJ.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@ googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/ group/lojban?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/2mX0GCr8M5IJ.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.